Urban-Dwelling Community Members' Views on Biomedical Research Engagement

Lessons Learned in Clinical Research Recruitment of Midlife Latinas During COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this brief report is to describe lessons learned in recruiting and enrolling midlife Latinas in a pilot study to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk during the menopause transition. We also discuss strategies implemented to overcome the challenges presented by the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

Menopausia, Salud y Corazo´n is a two-group (intervention, waitlist control), repeated measures study. The intervention consists of CVD risk education, coping skills training, physical activity, and stress management. Eligible participants are peri- and early postmenopausal Latinas age 40 to 60 years, free of CVD. From August 2020 to October 2021, we screened 110 women recruited from cultural events and health fairs (n = 56), local businesses (n = 24), and snowball sampling (n = 30). Of these, 60 were eligible for inclusion and 41 enrolled.

RESULTS

Strategies that contributed to successful recruitment included: a primarily Latina bilingual (English, Spanish) research team; flexibility with location and scheduling of data collection; and multiple modes of communication (ie, mailings, phone calls, and text messages). Additionally, we addressed Latino cultural values such as respeto (respect), familismo (loyalty to family), and confianza (trust). In response to COVID-19, we included virtual recruitment strategies, limited in-person visits, and distributed community resources for COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

We have found that despite the challenges presented by COVID-19, midlife Latinas are receptive to clinical research engagement. Researcher flexibility, multiple recruitment modalities, a bilingual research team, and communication strategies that address cultural values are essential elements for the representation of midlife Latinas in research.

Sharing research results with Latina breast cancer survivors who participated in a community-engaged behavioral RCT study: a descriptive cross-sectional survey study

BACKGROUND

An often heard and justifiable concern of ethnic minorities is related to researchers' lack of attention to sharing the results of a study with participants after the study has concluded. Few studies have examined the effects of returning overall study results on participants' attitudes, especially among populations underrepresented in research. Among Latina research participants, providing a summary of study results could enhance participation in research. We assess Latina breast cancer survivors' reactions to receiving study results and their attitudes about participating in future studies.

METHODS

For this cross-sectional survey study, all women who had participated in two behavioral randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were mailed a letter summarizing the study results (using written and graphic formats) and a questionnaire assessing problems and understanding the results, importance of sharing results, willingness to participate in future studies, and format preferences for receiving the results. A postage-paid envelope for returning the completed questionnaire was included. Logistic regression examined the associations of age, education, and rural/urban residence on format preferences and willingness to participate. The survey sample consisted of 304 low-income, predominantly Spanish-speaking Latina breast cancer survivors (151 from urban and 153 from rural communities) who had participated in two RCTs testing a stress management program designed for Latina breast cancer survivors.

RESULTS

Ninety-two women returned the questionnaires (30.3%). Most of the women (91.1%) indicated that they had no trouble understanding the results of the study, and 97% agreed that it is very/extremely important for researchers to share the study result with the participants. The majority (60.2%) reported that receiving the results increased their willingness to participate in future studies. About half (51.7%) did not have a format preference, 37.4% preferred written summaries, and 10.9% preferred graphs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is an important first step to understanding the impact of returning study results among a population that is underrepresented in research. Returning the results of studies and understanding the impact of doing so is consistent with maintaining community involvement in all phases of research. The findings suggest that sharing aggregate research results in simple language yields few problems in participants' understanding of the results and is viewed as important by participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02931552 Date registered: October 13, 2016 and NCT01383174 Date registered: June 28, 2011.

Predictors of Participation in Clinical Research

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Background

Despite numerous efforts to create more equitable healthcare systems, minority populations face long-standing health disparities compared to White populations. Healthcare research is the necessary foundation for creating equitable health systems and providing patient-centered care. Significant challenges exist, however, with recruiting and engaging underrepresented populations in clinical research.

Objectives

The purpose of this analysis was to determine how research participants' race, trust, and level of education influence participation barriers in clinical research.

Methods

The study used secondary, cross-sectional survey data that were collected between 2014 and 2016 through the former Mid-South Clinical Data Research Network, currently known as the Stakeholders, Technology, and Research Clinical Research Network. Descriptive statistics and Spearman rank correlations were performed between level of education, level of trust, and each attitude statement for each racial category.

Results

A total of 2,190 survey responses were used in the data analysis. The mean age of respondents was 52 years, with majority being women, White, insured, and working full time. Overall, the respondents had favorable attitudes toward research participation. Trust was correlated with agreement in many attitude statements for both White and African American respondents, whereas correlations with education level were more variable depending on racial grouping. Trust level was negatively associated with agreement toward the statement “researchers do not care about me” in White and Native American respondents.

Discussion

The results support the importance of trust to research participation. Generally, education level was not strongly predictive of research participation, although prediction was influenced by race and attitude.

Improving community participation in clinical and translational research: CTSA Sentinel Network proof of concept study

BACKGROUND

Research participation by members of racial or ethnic minority groups continues to be less than optimum resulting in difficulties to generalization of research findings. Community-engaged research that relies on a community health worker (CHW) model has been found effective in building trust in the community, thereby motivating people to participate in health research. The Sentinel Network study aimed at testing the feasibility of utilizing the CHW model to link community members to appropriate health research studies at each of the research sites.

METHODS

The study was conducted at six Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions (N = 2371) across the country; 733 (30.9%) of the participants were from the University of Florida, 525 (22.0%) were from Washington University in St. Louis, 421 (17.8%) were from the University of California, Davis, 288 (12.1%) were from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 250 (10.5%) were from Rochester, and 154 (6.5%) from Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Trained CHWs from each of these sites conducted regular community outreach where they administered a Health Needs Assessment, provided medical and social referrals, and linked to eligible research studies at each of those sites. A 30-day follow-up assessment was developed to track utilization of services satisfaction with the services and research study participation.

RESULTS

A large majority of people, especially African Americans, expressed willingness to participate in research studies. The top two health concerns reported by participants were hypertension and diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Findings on the rate of navigation and enrollment in research from this study indicate the effectiveness of a hybrid CHW service and research model of directly engaging community members to encourage people to participate in research.

Biobanks and the Moral Concerns of Donors: A Democratic Deliberation

Do members of the public believe that biobanks should accommodate the moral concerns of donors about the types of research done with their biospecimens? The answer to this question is critical to the future of genomic and precision medicine, endeavors that rely on a public willing to share their biospecimens and medical data. To explore public attitudes regarding the requirements of consent for biobank donations, we organized three democratic deliberations involving 180 participants. The deliberative sessions involved small group discussions informed by presentations given by experts in both biobank research and ethics. We found that participants had a sophisticated understanding of the ethical problems of biobank consent and the complexity of balancing donor concerns while promoting research important to the future of health care. Our research shows how deliberative methods can offer policy makers creative ideas for accommodating the moral concerns of donors in the biobank consent process.

Conducting secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we, and how?

While secondary data analysis of quantitative data has become commonplace and encouraged across disciplines, the practice of secondary data analysis with qualitative data has met more criticism and concerns regarding potential methodological and ethical problems. Though commentary about qualitative secondary data analysis has increased, little is known about the current state of qualitative secondary data analysis or how researchers are conducting secondary data analysis with qualitative data. This critical interpretive synthesis examined research articles (n = 71) published between 2006 and 2016 that involved qualitative secondary data analysis and assessed the context, purpose, and methodologies that were reported. Implications of findings are discussed, with particular focus on recommended guidelines and best practices of conducting qualitative secondary data analysis.

Learning and Action in Community Health: Using the Health Belief Model to Assess and Educate African American Community Residents about Participation in Clinical Research

The Learning and Action in Community Health project was implemented to gather preliminary data needed to inform community-engaged educational approaches to increase clinical research participation among racial minorities. The Health Belief Model was the theoretical framework utilized to develop the intervention and assessment tools. An educational session about clinical research and biorepository participation was designed using clinicaltrials.gov information and administered to adult, African American community residents (n = 60) in Atlanta, Georgia. Pre- and post-tests were collected and analyzed to assess changes in participants’ knowledge, perceptions, and willingness to participate in clinical studies and biorepositories. There were statistically significant changes in knowledge about joining a clinical study (p < 0.001) and registry or biorepository (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant change in willingness to participate in clinical research or biorepositories after the educational session. Focus groups were conducted to gather feedback on the educational session and perceived barriers and benefits to participating in clinical research. Perceived benefits were improving health, receiving incentives, early detection of health issues, and access to care. Perceived barriers included fear, lack of knowledge, historical mistrust of research, and time constraints. Results have implications for subsequent community-engaged approaches to increasing minority participation in clinical research.